I hate these tourneys but they do give you extra organized practice time just like the trip to Spain did. I get why AAC is not interested but ironically for a young team like Tulane they could help it prepare for next season.

I hate these tourneys but they do give you extra organized practice time just like the trip to Spain did. I get why AAC is not interested but ironically for a young team like Tulane they could help it prepare for next season.

I took a look at the tourney fields for both CBI and CIT last year... there was at least 1 sub .500 team and they were from the WAC (Utah State). Probably the reason the AAC has that policy.

I look at it as a chance for Reynolds to play more games and as you point out, more practice time. I have no problem not being allowed to play, though.. more incentive to win more to get into the NIT!!

_________________YOGWF - of all the Tulane fans in the world, we're the Tulaniest

Alas, I think we are done for the season. Done, not as having quit or packed it in, but done as in second time through the schedule, fatigued, well scouted, exposed.

We’ll snatch a game here or there and hopefully improve a full ten games over last season, but i believe the only postseason we might have will have to be pay-to-play. The fact that we were still interested in February is a big improvement over years past and the future looks brighter.

Since our conference doesn't allow schools to participate in the pay for play tournaments, a realistic goal at this point is to finish above .500 for the season. 6 regular season games left and at least one game in the conference tourney. Not likely to beat Cincy or Wichita State. Need to find 3 more wins with UCF, Memphis, USF and ECU.

We need to go undefeated this week. Certainly doable. Memphis is terrible on the road, and they aren't playing well right now, either.

That will get us to 15-11 (6-8). Probably will only get one more win after that (@USF), but a 16-14 (7-11) finish wouldn't be that bad, considering where we were last season.

If we end up as the 10 seed in the conference tournament, we'll play a winnable game in the 1st round against someone like Memphis, UCF, or UConn. Then, if you want to talk about making an actual run in the conference tournament, we'll be on the opposite side of the bracket as Cincinnati. And the Bearcats are far and away the best team in the league.

I once asked a college coach with a decade plus of pro experience what the biggest difference was. He said "organized practice time." It can be as simple as working with a player on individual technique to full squad scrimmages.

In short will playing in it make Tulane better next season? That's what I care about. I have no clue if Dunleavy wants it. I support whatever he prefers here not AAC branding managers in Providence.

I'm curious who made the rule that being able to practice for an extra two weeks or whatever is beneath one's standards and pride if it includes playing several run of the mill teams before thin crowds and less media and tv? In other words, glorified exhibition games. This is like playing Arizona fall ball or Caribbean League baseball if you're a pro after the regular season is over. You do it to improve not for pub, or to win or lose, or raise your self-esteem.

I question the marginal benefit 1 or 2 extra weeks of practice right after a 3 month season - especially considering that, if anything, this team is tired. 8 man rotation takes its toll. And its pay to play; and it's well below AAC (and Tulane) standards.

For a bowl, you spend 2 weeks practicing the 1/2 the roster that got very few reps during the year.

_________________A refreshing culture of standards, expectations and accountability is upon us.

I question the marginal benefit 1 or 2 extra weeks of practice right after a 3 month season - especially considering that, if anything, this team is tired. 8 man rotation takes its toll. And its pay to play; and it's well below AAC (and Tulane) standards.

Not sure I agree, GSx. Especially if you use the practice/playing time to develop the players that didn't get the significant minutes--i.e the two big centers who need the development. Clearly, they could use the experience to hone their game, and the coaches could use it to determine if they will ever pan out--or not. Agreed if all we do is play the same eight and gut out every win. Frankly, Paul, being a senior, should only see the floor if Ajang and Koka foul out. Reynolds is the scorer and needs to be in the game, but we need to see if there are options to pick up the scoring load. It's all about recruiting and next season.

I personally see the benefit. As to Tulane's standards for post-season basketball, I'd say they need some tweaking.

I remember Bowden turned down the Idaho Potato Bowl in 1997 because it was going to cost more than we would take in. Looking back on it, I think that thinking was short-sighted. Same here.

The NIT is often referred to as the "Nobody Interested Tournament." The CBI would be something like "Couldn't Beat Iona."

The NIT would have been nice for us, but it isn't going to happen. The CBI is moot as our league does not participate, but in my opinion it wouldn't be a reward and wouldn't increase our exposure. Almost nobody outside of the teams competing even knows it exists.

Is Koka injured? He has played in 7 games this year which I assume means he wouldn't be eligible to be redshirted.

Otherwise, why didn't he play against Tulsa when we were pulling players out of the crowd?

I believe he's been fighting knee issues since preseason, though it could be something else (I know he had knee concerns early and I thought I heard they were tough to shake, but I could certainly be wrong).

From everything I have heard, Ajang and Koka are not projects. They are both legit and just need to learn the game. I really don’t think the project title applies. Ajang is logging more minutes and he has a lot of upside. Koka was at Houston, but did not dress. Same for Barrett. To reiterate on Barrett, he is a PG who is considered to possibly be an elite defender.

If we only end up with one scholarship left, do we look for a PG or a big?

With all due respect to what you have heard they are both clearly projects. That's based on how both have looked and the fact that if they weren't projects they would be playing very important roles on this team at positions of need.

Frankly, Paul, being a senior, should only see the floor if Ajang and Koka foul out.

Paul is a junior. But his play lately has merited this situation regardless.

Anyway, it's moot. The AAC has a no pay tourney policy.

Rules are made to be broken and policies aren't even rules. The policy makes sense for higher profile teams with disappointing seasons (your UConns and whatnot) but wonder if an exception would be made for a young up and coming team? More curious than anything since I don't think it's that big of a deal either way.

Frankly, Paul, being a senior, should only see the floor if Ajang and Koka foul out.

Paul is a junior. But his play lately has merited this situation regardless.

Anyway, it's moot. The AAC has a no pay tourney policy.

Rules are made to be broken and policies aren't even rules. The policy makes sense for higher profile teams with disappointing seasons (your UConns and whatnot) but wonder if an exception would be made for a young up and coming team? More curious than anything since I don't think it's that big of a deal either way.

What you describe is why a team might choose not to play in the NIT. The policy not to play in those period has nothing to do with team...it is a matter of league. AAC is a power basketball league. Teams in power leagues do not play in pay for play tournaments, nor should they. "Young up and coming" - some nice code there.

_________________A refreshing culture of standards, expectations and accountability is upon us.